Murphy Floats Defunding Police Who Won’t Violate Second Amendment

Join him in disarming fellow Americans or Murphy threatens to make things a lot more dangerous by “defunding” law enforcemet. (Senator Chris Murphy/Facebook)

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Sen. Chris Murphy on Sunday suggested withholding federal funds from law enforcement agencies that refuse to enforce state and national gun laws in the wake of mass shootings in Colorado and Virginia,” the New York Post reports. “Murphy (D-Conn.), an outspoken advocate for gun control laws and an assault weapons ban, said the Senate needs to have a conversation about funding law enforcement outfits that balk at implementing gun laws in ‘Second Amendment sanctuaries.’”

It figures someone who breaks his oath to the Constitution every time he sees an opportunity to expand his personal power would seek ways to punish those who don’t. It also figures someone who has hitched his political star to citizen disarmament would see reducing police presence and effectiveness in “conservative” jurisdictions as a great way to encourage more violence, with resulting blood dance opportunities to promote more “commonsense gun safety laws.”

Murphy knows the Second Amendment mandates “shall not be infringed.” He also knows the only delegated, and thus legitimate Constitutional power the Congress has related to an armed citizenry is “To provide for calling forth the Militia…” and “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia…”

That and issuing Letters of Marque and Reprisal so armed privateers could engage enemies of the Republic with real “weapons of war”…

What Murphy is doing is extorting law enforcement that refuses to waste resources enforcing edicts that clearly violate the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling, like the Oregon sheriffs who have gone on record as refusing to go after Measure 114 magazine ban defiers. And not just them, but also on non-Democrat-dominated political jurisdictions, as exemplified by the growing number of “Second Amendment sanctuary” cities and counties (what lying, race-baiting Democrats smear as “Civil War Flashpoints”). Add to that states that not only won’t enforce infringements, but that have enacted their own laws to override them, and are fighting in court to have them upheld, like Texas suing ATF “for unlawfully prohibiting firearm silencers.”

Murphy also knows that just because a law is passed does not make it Constitutional. While some originalists argue the 1803 Marbury v. Madison decision in which the Supreme Court assigned itself the power to declare a law passed by Congress to be unconstitutional, others counter it is a necessary check and balance for a coequal branch of government. Bottom line, as things stand:

“A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.”

Murphy also knows that just because an agent of the state is given an order, that does not make it lawful. Without getting into another argument about U.S. law and international tribunals, a key principle emphasized in the Nuremberg Trials was that “just following orders” does not give enforcers a pass to abuse human rights.

Long before that, though, and since the Bruen standard is to employ “historical understanding,” U.S. law made it clear:

“The first recorded case of a United States Military officer using the ‘I was only following orders’ defense dates back to 1799. During the War with France, Congress passed a law making it permissible to seize ships bound for any French Port. However, when President John Adams wrote the authorization order, he wrote that U.S. Navy ships were authorized to seize any vessel bound for a French port, or traveling from a French port. Pursuant to the President’s instructions, a U.S. Navy captain seized a Danish Ship (the Flying Fish), which was en route from a French Port. The owners of the ship sued the Navy captain in U.S. Maritime Court for trespass. They won, and the United States Supreme Court upheld the decision. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Navy commanders ‘act at their own peril’ when obeying presidential orders when such orders are illegal.”

Military oaths aside, the “prime directive” by which civilian government is supposed to be bound is articulated in Article VI. of the Constitution:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution…”

Again, Murphy knows this. He’s been raising his hand and lying about it all of his adult life, since leaving academia and planting his snout firmly in the public sector trough back in the late Nineties.

Basically, we’re talking about a career parasite dictating the terms of surrender to freedom-minded Americans by threatening to withhold the redistribution of plunder coerced from them in the first place. If he keeps pushing hard enough, he and others issuing orders may one day realize that it’s not just those who follow them who will come to wish they hadn’t.

Curiously, though, there is one group of defiers of federal law Murphy not only has no problem with but actively supports because it advances the Democrat agenda. “Sanctuary cities” for the Second Amendment are out with him, but here’s what he says about “sanctuary” for illegal aliens:

“I’m going to fight like hell and will do everything in my power to stand up for you and your families,” U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy told a room full of young people in Fair Haven who fear an incoming president may kick them out of the country. ​“You are American and you are a part of the fabric of this country.”


About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

Subscribe
Notify of
33 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Arizona

Why are police and sheriff offices receiving any funds from the federal gov? The federal gov is receiving taxes it should not, money that should never have left the states, and using it to BRIBE state governments and agencies to do the corrupt federal gov’s bidding. Just say no. To the taxes and the demands.

nrringlee

True story. Tell that to the leadership of the uni-party in DC.

Montana454Casull

Chris Murphy – Anti American, Democrat , communist ,progressive , socialist . You have been exposed clown !

Norm

Whenever a democrat or other politician says they want to have a “conversation”, what they really mean is you have to be quiet while they yell at you.

GomeznSA

Norm – ya missed the part about sitting down and doing what you are told, and ‘liking’ it. ;-(

musicman44mag

Or sit down and listen to every word because this is what I am dictating is going to happen to you.

musicman44mag

Lol. I used to engage them in dialog not to long ago. I read Alinsky’s rules for Anti Radicals and that changed how I think and handle things. Rather than argue, now I just say that’s a shame, that’s too bad, I understand how you FEEL, and I’m glad I don’t share your opinion because that would make it my burden and I don’t live with it. LOL Smile and walk away. If you cannot educate others of an open mind why argue. You are not going to change the marxists opinion no matter how hard you try. They want… Read more »

Ledesma

This liberal must be delirious! 99% of Americans are stuck in the crime racked cities. Where friendly, understanding county Sheriffs don’t exist. Just ticket pushing blue backs! Who have been conniving with liberals in this anti-2A crusade from the beginning. The only 2A these lizards recognize is whatever might apply to themselves! Not Americans! I spent years of my life overseas. Not in the swanky resorts like civilian tourists but in the police states of the world. And I learned quickly that the cornerstone of these vile regimes is who else? The POLICE! And as soon as 90 million armed… Read more »

Steve

There is more than just 90 million armed citizens – although that doesn’t mean there’s more patriots out there willing to fight for their God given rights.

nrringlee

Progressives working with their globalist pals will seek any means possible to disarm and silence the population. Riots in The People’s Republic of China are a strong indication of push back by normal people who resist but unfortunately the Chinese people do not have the benefit of a Second Amendment to back up their nonexistent First Amendment. We have both. For a reason. The reason can be found in the poster boy of American Fascism, Chris Murphy. So how do you call out a wanna-be American Fascist? Simple. Apply the shoe on the other foot logic test to any of… Read more »

gregs

agreed, many politicians, of both sides, only follow the laws that they find useful at that moment. either all laws should be followed or not laws should be followed, you can’t have it both ways.

hippybiker

You might want to remember the real “Holocaust.” That would be the estimated 200 million liquidated by the Soviet and Chinese governments with their Police and Military’s! Compared to them, Uncle Adolph was a Piker!

gregs

many leo’s say they support the Constitution, they they try and violate it by demanding identification when no crime has occurred, they freak out at the sight of a firearm and demand a person’s justification for possessing one and assume everyone carrying a firearm is a criminal until they prove themselves innocent, they conspire to come up with a crime with which to kidnap and imprison someone. i support GOOD leo’s, not all. i understand that leo’s are a subset of the general population and there are bad people in gen pop, so the same goes for leo’s. qualified immunity… Read more »

Bubba

Lol.
Murphy said “You are American”

He has absolutely no idea what that term means…
What a moron.

Larry

Well, most of ’em are. South American, Central American…

Ral3312

And the DIVORCE is almost upon us. I don’t believe there will be a presidential election in two years or should I another thief by the left

Finnky

I suspect we are further than that from divorce. Inertia and disbelief will result in waiting until things are nigh impossible. Making matters worse as delay will result in more violence instead of a simple amicable divorce. 🙁

Tionico

this clown fails to realise he is one of about 450 who have the authority to make law. .He cannot, on his own, make law, or promises. While it does fall to the legislative branch to c”establish a uniform rule of naturalisation” but have NO AUTHORITY to determine who may/mayn’t enter the United States. That falls to the Executive branch. He further fails to realise that his legislative body HAVE crated that “unifirm rule of naturalisation” and HE stands opposed to that rul, violating and setting aside its rovisions at will.

Not fit for office. OUT he should go.

Larry

It doesn’t even. Naturalization and immigration are two different things. Control of immigration should be directly up to the states. It was usurped by the feds in the Chinese Exclusion Cases, the original “emanations and penumbras” ruling in which the sovereign power to control immigration magically wafted from the person of King George to the yet-nonexistent federal government, without ever apparently passing through the constitution’s 10th amendment.

Monkey Mouse

Local police should outright refuse to protect him – he will need to rely on the 2 or 3 capital police assigned to him when out in public. So if he gets rolled on heavy, let him go down like the “brave man” he claims to be.

GomeznSA

Sometimes I get murphy confused with danang dicky – but not really an issue as both of them are wannabe tyrants.
What it boils down to with those types is that they are trying to do is essentially mafia style tactics – nice police department ya got there, be a real shame if something were to happen to it………………

Boz

Citizens fIoat hanging treasonous politicians.

PAF145

Why do these morons continue to push for a civil war that they will lose ?

Finnky

Depends on how you define lose. My expectation is that violence would be brief and country would split. To many democrats having all the flyover states cede from the union would be a plus. To them this would be a win.

Would you continue fighting to free the worst states and force them to remain in constitutional states of america? Personally, if we get to that point, I’d be thankful to be rid of them.

Arizona Don

Both sides thought the civil war of 1861 would last only about 90 days. Both sides were wrong. It lasted four years and well over six hundred thousand Americans were killed or in one way or another lost their lives in that war. While nearly a million were wounded A civil war should be the very last resort for it usually starts more problems then it solves! However, in the near future one may absolutely be necessary especially if the left continues to push for a socialist autocratic government. Furthermore who thinks if America gets involved in a civil war… Read more »

Larry

A strategy that relies on retreat and withdrawal dooms you to extinction. You’re giving locusts half the farm you used to own. Nothing stops them from moving in and doing it again.

Rowboat

Because they can . What is tolerated will continue.

DeadAngel

Time to Defund Politicians.

DIYinSTL

Would or could a Letter of Marque exempt one from the Hughes amendment, or for that matter from the NFA and ITAR as a whole? Just curious about a hypothetical. Wish I was asking for a friend.

TNJEWBOY

It’s because of the Seventeeth Amendment we have traitorous idiots like Murphy and his friend Blumenthal.

KK

I think, more, the discussion we need to be having is about the oh so many police departments that are oh so happy, willing, and enthusiastic about being the PROGRESSIVE GESTAPO ENFORCING THE REPEAL OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT. “OUR HEROES” that really like being the “ONLY ONES” in oh to many locations. After NYSRPA v Bruin, police departments are working with democrat lawmakers to insure that the Second Amendment remains: The right of government law enforcement officials, active and retired, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Everyone else, SCREW YOU. They feel very entitled to a better… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by KK
Larry

There is no such thing as a “blue” to “back.” Rid yourself of this collectivist notion. If your local government supports you, its police will support you. If it oppresses you, its police will oppress you. By default, expect to be treated by police as you would be treated by paid mercenaries of whatever elites hired them, and this expectation will almost always serve you well.

Cooter

Any worthless politicians who violates their oath to enforce the constitution should be immediately fired and banned from the government for life without benefits…Past History plainly shows you that all tyrants first thing they want is to disarm the people good luck with that you MORON

Last edited 1 month ago by Cooter